Sadly looking like another one...

[urlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22195495[/url

Fook me



You are aware that most fertilisers make an ideal constituent for explosives?

True, either way that was one hell of an explosion.

Terrible few days for America.

I think this may be a case of old fashioned irresponsibility by a company dealing in potentially dangerous material. Thought to be approximately 70 dead.

<NRA mode> The only way to deal with bad fertiliser handling is to fight it with good fertiliser handling </NRA mode>

One minute of searching indicates that a fire broke out at the fertilizer plant and evacuations were already taking place when there was an explosion.

The thread title is just ridiculous and totally unjustfiable. There' absolutely zero, nothing, nada to even hint at any "bomb" and never was.

I think the question mark is sufficient personally.

My first thought when I saw the location of this 2.1 megaton explosion was aliens or testing of reverse engineered alien technology.

Must admit that I did jump to the conclusion that it could be a bomb given the size of the explosion as well as the timing.

When the news broke on twitter this morning there were many people thinking the same thing.

How silly of us all.

You posted a link at the top of this thread that indicated quite clearly that there wasn't even the suggestion of a bomb. Did you not bother to read it first?

No, I reacted to the twitter feed.

You posted a link that you hadn't read first?
A long shot this ... but that could be where you went wrong.

Yes, I agree.

You do realise the first rule of the sin bin is never admit you made a mistake ( even if you did) as some pedant will pick up on it and it will be thrown back at you in perpetuity.

If it were me I'd edit my first post on this thread and change the title to something like "Bombs in Texas? No of course not, don't be ridiculous, its just an explosion of e" or something...

Actually, "poop" sounds funnier than "shiite" so put "poop".

Job's a good'un

Can you have a word with Dally?
He needs to know how to admit a mistake.

But why would a pedant pick up on it? Pedants, surely, are interested (inter alia) in picking up on minor mistakes or correcting trivial errors for the sake of it. Call me pedantic, but I can't see the connection between admission of prior errors and pedantry.

Even if that was the case, it couldn't be thrown back at him "in perpetuity", as the OP is unlikely to live that long.

But he didn't say there was a connection, merely that some pedant might do it.
Being a pedant is not mutally exclusive with mentioning an admitted error.